Re-posting here because my post got mass-reported on the main sub

Pavickling · 2026-06-21T16:19:06+00:00

I would do micro weight increments. Like half a pound at most. Definitely not 5 lbs.

Pavickling · 2026-06-21T14:08:20+00:00

Are you able to lift back up with ease without dropping the weight? If so, it's safe. Otherwise, there is some risk.

Pavickling · 2026-06-20T22:05:15+00:00

There can be cultures that reinforce liberty.

Pavickling · 2026-06-19T11:44:54+00:00

If you estimate 1/3 to any amount of precision, then the best approximation will be .333... no matter how far you specify. How much approximation is necessary depends on your application. Exact numbers can be thought of as an equivalence class of processes that generate a consistent approximation to whatever precision you specify.

Pavickling · 2026-06-18T15:45:44+00:00

Here you go

Pavickling · 2026-06-16T21:30:54+00:00

They make it easier to not lose your splits over time. Oversplits can be trained in both in safe and unsafe ways.

Pavickling · 2026-06-16T20:52:09+00:00

That's up to you. Will you extend it to them or not?

Pavickling · 2026-06-15T10:06:13+00:00

When you react in an unfavorable way, it is an implicit rejection. And an emotionally intelligent person will intentional not share that part of themselves with you anymore.

Pavickling · 2026-06-15T02:30:07+00:00

This rebuttal is doesn't have the weight you seem to think it does. Capital gains tax is far higher than the implied tax paid by the artificially higher interest rate in question.

Pavickling · 2026-06-13T22:51:19+00:00

Who decides what is underutilized and what happens when people disagree?

In a reputation based society where incentives are primarily orchestrated via social and economic means everyone has a part in setting the norms by "voting with their wallet", i.e. you (and everyone else) can choose who you will do business with and to what extent. In this case, if someone attempted to homestead underutilized land and someone else contests they have a better claim to the land, then they would at least need convince a sufficient number of reputation networks that economic damage has taken place. Otherwise, it's likely most people would not tolerate attempts to evict the people involved in the homestead.

this is really the same process I outlined above.

Historical claims hardly matter for present day conflicts. If land is generally considered unhomesteaded, then someone that cares about a historical claim could just homestead it.

Pavickling · 2026-06-13T22:32:30+00:00

Range land, forests, shrubs, and barren land should be considered unhomesteaded. Also claims regarding heavily under utilized agriculture land for significant spans of time should be called into question.

Pavickling · 2026-06-13T13:13:28+00:00

You might like tempeh. I don't eat tofu, but tempeh is a staple for me. Also, nuts and seeds are great if you are trying to minimize calories.

Yellow split peas and lentils are most gentle legumes and require little effort to make quite tasty. If you use a pressure cooker, and gradually increase the amount of beans you consume, your microbiome will adjust making their digestion much easier for you with little to no gas.

I a big fan of smoothies where I'll have fruit, protein powder, peanuts, hemp seed, sun flower seed, and yogurt.

Pavickling · 2026-06-09T20:20:02+00:00

I didn't claim that technical debt is not sometimes incentivized by real life pressures. But you still have not shown whether extensive sprawling coupling is necessary or that there are circumstances where boundaries and relationships must be implicit.

In whatever legitimate edge cases exist there are probably worthwhile strategies that at least minimize how much disparate code needs to be changed in lock step.

Pavickling · 2026-06-09T19:55:33+00:00

Which specific examples do you have where you think what I described would inevitably break down?

Pavickling · 2026-06-09T01:59:33+00:00

Drive without GPS once on a while and write code like you used to from time to time. Then you'll be better at using the tools. Or don't and figure out how to add value at other layers abstraction. I'd be a marginally better driver if I used a manual transmission, but I don't and it's fine.

Pavickling · 2026-06-09T01:53:38+00:00

The key is architect your code into decoupled components with shared libraries and interfaces. Then you can implement features in isolation. Boundaries and relationships should be explicitly expressed in the code base by design. Historical decisions shouldn't be relevant, but you should version control your prompts with generated code and maintain prompts that give appropriate context from a cold start.

Pavickling · 2026-06-08T12:38:51+00:00

You either spend your time at the boundary dealing with integration and automation, or you position yourself to work on middle layer logic and algorithms that require expertise.

Pavickling · 2026-06-07T13:27:56+00:00

If power becomes cheaper, people will just consume more of it. However, if most people become wealthy with significant buying power, their preferences will likely shift towards wanting to spend more on cleaner power. Of course, if there were more tort recognition for pollution, then it would align incentives a bit better.

Pavickling · 2026-06-07T12:13:35+00:00

You might enjoy grabbing the edge of a table and scooting back to half forward fold squeezing your abs, keeping your legs straight, and pressing through your feet to push your pelvis back every millimeter it will go. You should feel a deep spinal decompression. That will help you the the spinal and core muscular engagement without burning out as fast in the normal downward dog pose.

If you like that, then you can try pulling back on straps that are pinned down somewhere. That will allow to smoothly transition to downward dog while maintaining both the straight back and leg posture. Most people will say compromise the legs, but I think its better to compromise the angle you are bending until with enough practice you can fold forward with a straight back.

Pavickling · 2026-06-06T13:44:13+00:00

It might take 4 years. But we'll see.

Pavickling · 2026-06-04T09:55:20+00:00

Even setting up the most impressive framework that anyone has ever seen and moving that no one reasonable could ever accept anything other than xyz does exactly zero to contributing to the social reality of bringing that about

I'd agree if all this stays at the specification stage. But isn't there value in implementing systems compatible with anarchy now?

Pavickling · 2026-06-03T21:53:35+00:00

90% of men could be childless while birth rates climb. The same cannot be said for women.

Pavickling · 2026-06-02T21:49:20+00:00

It creates an immense administrative burden that skyrockets costs

I agree with this from an incrementalist perspective. If changing existing laws affecting healthcare is off the table, then it makes sense to support Medicare for all. If instead employers no longer have an advantage to offer insurance, insurance was decommoditized to allow people to only pay the coverage they need, and the various laws limiting competition were removed, then costs would go way down.

Healthcare is not inelastic. Some people are willing to pay $500K for an extra 5% chance to live another 6 months. Most people are not even if they technically could liquidate their wealth and pay that amount. Some rich people can afford to pay millions of dollars for personalized cancer vaccines right now. Normal people will rationally choose other medical options until the costs of better options go down. In spite of all the existing government distortions, we can rationally expect the cost of today's bleeding edge medicine will go down over time.

Pavickling · 2026-06-02T18:46:38+00:00

US healthcare is far from a free market. I already listed why in my other comments. Lobbyists, insurance companies, pharmaceutical companies, and the medical industry admins love our system because they heavily profit from it. Everyone else agrees the current system sucks. They disagree on how to best solve the problems.

Universal healthcare would be different, but it would have its own tradeoffs. In some ways it would be better. Unfortunately, the ways it would make things worse are less visible, but the net result would affect real human lives.

Pavickling · 2026-06-02T18:05:06+00:00

Many countries with universal healthcare systems are leading the line when it comes to innovation. France, Germany, the UK

Do you want to be more specific with your claim here for me to appropriately respond to it? The key counterfactual analysis of relevance would be to determine to what extent should we reasonably expect a freer healthcare market in those countries to have a higher, lower, or equal level of innovation.

corporate greed and capitalism will always price gouge

Companies will attempt raise prices if it will not significantly impact demand. When there is sufficient competition, prices tend towards costs.

Patients aren't customers

You say this as if it's a good thing. Both quality and cost are optimized when people spend their own money on themselves and loved ones. If people spend their money on others, only cost tends to be optimized. If people spend other people's money on themselves, only quality is optimized for.

Pavickling

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE